Hey, now there's two warm onkeys! Just the thing for a cool September evening.

Oh, never mind, they're ex warm onkeys. No longer warm.

eta: Also, the previous looney tunes post should be read in the voice of The Tick.

--------------"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

I want to practice reading it in my best William S. Burroughs imitation.

--------------"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

AFDave's tard figure is legendary, and I've enjoyed revisiting some of that great tard recently as a result of the survey on greatest tard of.all.time

what i think is hilarious is how TEH AUDITOR is willing to play the same game of "what i wish the data said". for those of you not following this slowmotion trainwreck i apologize for introducing you to an entirely new drawer full of the hard tard. you may OD if you try to get the backstory

So very tired of this crap. I've spent the last three days basically debunking that damned Seralini paper about the GM-fed rats that got cancer.

It's stupid crap paper, the conclusions are totally impossible, and everyone who's anti-GM crops is going apeshit over it. Jesus these people are scientifically illiterate morons.

"100%* of the rats fed a 22% diet of GM-corn got cancer and died after 2 years."

"Really? Wow, who'd have thought that a breed of rat specifically designed to get cancers would have died of cancer after half their normal life span. I can't imagine a human about 45 years old with cancer."

"But, 100% of the rats died from it."

"Hmm... 70% of the rats that had no GM-feed and no pesticide also died."

"So?"

"What did the control rats die from?"

"Cancer."

"What caused the cancer in the control rats?"

"I don't know. The paper doesn't say."

"How do you know that what caused the cancer in the control rats did not cause cancer in the experimental rats?"

"Because the experimental rats ate GM-feed."

"Oh sorry, Joe, I didn't recognize you there. You're an idiot. Please explain, using data from the paper, how we know that the experimental rats didn't died from the same thing the control rats died from."

"Because the experimental rats were fed GM-feed."

"Ever heard of confirmation bias?"

"No."

"Ever heard of cherry-picking?"

"No."

"Yeah, I didn't think so. Sigh. BTW: Did you happen to note that out of 18** experimental groups, the control group had MORE deaths than 3 of them?"

"Yeah so?"

"And did you also notice that in 3 of those groups that the rats fed the MOST GM-feed and pesticide had the LOWEST death rate?"

"Yeah so?"

"And that 3 other groups that had the most GM-feed had the second lowest death rate? So out of 6 groups that got the most of the GM feed, pesticide, or whatever... all of them had fewer deaths than the other experimental groups."

"Yeah so?"

"SO what Seralini is saying is that you're more likely to survive being shot in the chest twice instead of once."

"huh?"

"Oh yeah. Sorry Joe, sarcasm. You wouldn't get it. As I have just shown, it is impossible to draw the conclusion that GM-feed and cancer are even correlated, much less that GM-feed causes cancer."

"So, you're saying that inspite of the cancer and death, GM-food is safe."

"Sigh, no moron. I'm saying that the paper is useless. No conclusions can be drawn from it. And that we should just look at the dozens of other papers that show GM-food as not being dangerous... at least until actual valid evidence appears otherwise."

Repeat...

* all 10

** Yes 18! experimental groups... all compared to the same 20 controls.

--------------Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

God must exist because atheists exist. At least it's a new one, I guess.

Yeah, it's like HIV immunity exists, so therefore HIV must exist.

Wait...

Which "God"?

The catholic priest said:

"If an atheist exists, then God must also exist."

Does that apply to all the alleged gods individually?

If I were to say that I believe in only Fifi the pink unicorn god, would I be an atheist when it comes to zeus, yhwh, allah, and all the other gods that people have made up?

Is being an atheist a matter of not believing in 'the one and only true God'™, or a matter of not believing in any god, and would an atheist have a different answer to that question than a theist who thinks that they believe in 'the one and only true God'™? For instance, does anyone think that gordo or arrington or o'leary or that catholic priest would agree that someone who believes in Fifi the pink unicorn god, but does not believe in and worship yhwh, is not an atheist? Would they accept that Fifi is or could be a god or 'the one and only true god'™ and that I could reasonably claim to be a theist if I believe in Fifi?

Edited by The whole truth on Sep. 27 2012,22:55

--------------Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

My understanding of that is that theism means belief that there is one or more gods (or entities with traits that we might call god-like), and atheism is lack of such belief.

Well, that's one of its two meanings (the other being belief that such things don't exist, rather than merely lack of belief that they do).

Then there are some people who think one or the other of those meanings is gospel, and anyone using the other meaning is trying to rewrite the dictionary or the language, or something.

Henry

Good points.

Your understanding, in at least your first paragraph, is likely how a lot of people would define theism and atheism and generally speaking I would agree, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that religious zealots like gordo, arrington, o'leary, etc., see anyone who doesn't believe in the same god they do, and in pretty much the same way they do, as an atheist, or close to it, even if they won't admit it.

It would be fun to put joey g, arrington, gordo, o'leary, mung, uptightbiped, etc., and some other god pushers from a variety of religions around the world into a locked room for awhile and come back later and see who's still alive (if anyone). The so-called "Big Tent" would likely collapse pretty quickly and they would probably kill and eat each other, after a lot of yelling and screaming about whose god is 'the one and only true god'™ and/or whose worship practices are the 'correct' ones.

--------------Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

There's a new blog network starting up. John Loftus is leading the effort. It'll be opening October 1. I'll post a link when it goes live.

The network is called Skeptic Ink Network (SIN).

And yours truly will be a blogger there.

There's a group of secularists, philosophers, skeptics, and science blogs. I'll be doing mostly science and skepticism work and the occasional other post as well. My blog will be called Smilodon's Retreat.

Thanks and I hope to see you there.

--------------Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

Rich has pointed out once again that people as stupid as joe will often fall for all kinds of hilarious bullshit. In this case, the bigger picture is the hilarious and predictable misrepresentations of tards on the polar ice extent results from this summer, which once again suggests that fake climate skeptics are just like creationists.

I am not even the first person to say, on this board, that there is probably no pseudo-scientific dumbshittery so incredibly fucking stupid that joe won't get behind it.

but if you like that sort of tard, man, WUWT is one of the most hilarious and fascinating things to read, like, ever. joe is not even the dumbest motherfucker on THAT board. might be the biggest man-whore though he would probably leave the northeast if rich would invite him down for a meating as long as they didn't go to the circus and blipey stayed wherever the fuck he is way over there

psst here is a whiff, hit this

Quote

Congress debunked Mann’s “hockey stick” in 2006, an English Judge rebuked Al Gore for falsehoods in his movie in 2007, and also in 2007 Hansen had to back off his “adjustments” due to the work of McIntyre at Climate Audit. When Rush Limbaugh mentioned McIntyre’s victory, Climate Audit was overwhelmed by traffic, which was one reason the existence of WUWT came to be known by me, and many others.

OH DEAR GOD YES THAT IS JUST WHAT I NEEDED THIS MORNING... CONGRESS-SCIENTISTS + TEH AUDITOR = ALGORE IS FAT!!!!!!

The profuse gyrations of the fake climate skeptics, over the dynamics of ice at the poles, are like the biggest longest friday meltdown EVAR. it's a tard, but it's tard on a whole 'notha level. The Argument Regarding Design here is that climate scientists are designing their data to fit alarmism. The inversion of the design argument is an interesting thing to consider, but my conclusion is that tards will say any fucking thing to make the idiot voices in their heads be quiet

that post man, it's like an atlas of tard. BEFORE YOU EVEN GET TO THE COMMENTS YOUR BRAIN WILL HAVE FUCKING DIED IN YOU'RE MOMS HEAD

Quote

I can not say for certain that, when I was young and sleeping in my car, I would not have been tempted by a grant for 1.7 million dollars. Perhaps even Beethoven would have been tempted to make pizza, rather than the Ninth Symphony, if someone had offered him 1.7 million dollars. (One interesting short piano work of Beethoven’s is entitled, “Rage Over A Lost Penny.”) Money is the root of all evil, and when we see scientists swayed by their patrons we should perhaps say, “There but for the Grace of God go I.” (And also, “Blessed are the poor.”)

In any case, it seems we live in a time when some scientists are working under the thumbs of benefactors and patrons who desire results presented with a certain political “spin.” If it is possible to present data concerning the melt of the Arctic Ice Cap in a way that makes it look more extreme, because this may make a carbon tax more possible, the scientist will be under great pressure to do so.

The scientist is in essence working with a frowning boss scowling over his shoulder. The only way we can counter-balance this effect is to also look over his shoulder, and give the poor fellow the sense that “the whole world is watching.” This will likely make scientists miserable, and also make them yearn for the days when they were ignored and could work in peaceful obscurity, however it will also keep them honest, which is for the best for all, in the long run.

Even as we behave in this somewhat petty and parental manner, we should not forget what brought most of us to examine the clouds and seas and sunshine and storms in the first place: Our sense of wonder. Others may focus their thinking to the cramped line-items of musty, budgetary chicanery for a narrow political cause, if they so chose, however the vast truths of creation remains open for the rest of us to witness, and to wonder about, if we so chose.

oh, sweet sweet sweet baby jesus making all the DNA right-handed, that shit is BEAUTIFUL

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 01 2012,10:01

--------------You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

The world is going to heaven in so many ways it's hard to keep count. Currently there's a guy in jail for blasphemy. He violated parole, but the reason he was arrested is that he made a bad movie critical of religion. Aside from that crime, he would not have been bothered.

He has been vilified by the government, and the U.N. is considering making blasphemy an international crime. I find the trend unsettling. I can see this morphing gradually into the criminalization of any writings that mock any aspect of religion. This entire site could cause outrage if it were publicised by people having an interest in promoting outrage.

--------------Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

The world is going to heaven in so many ways it's hard to keep count. Currently there's a guy in jail for blasphemy. He violated parole, but the reason he was arrested is that he made a bad movie critical of religion. Aside from that crime, he would not have been bothered.

He has been vilified by the government, and the U.N. is considering making blasphemy an international crime. I find the trend unsettling. I can see this morphing gradually into the criminalization of any writings that mock any aspect of religion. This entire site could cause outrage if it were publicised by people having an interest in promoting outrage.

My religion requires free speech for all. So they can start by locking themselves up.

There's a new blog network starting up. John Loftus is leading the effort. It'll be opening October 1. I'll post a link when it goes live.

The network is called Skeptic Ink Network (SIN).

And yours truly will be a blogger there.

There's a group of secularists, philosophers, skeptics, and science blogs. I'll be doing mostly science and skepticism work and the occasional other post as well. My blog will be called Smilodon's Retreat.

There's a new blog network starting up. John Loftus is leading the effort. It'll be opening October 1. I'll post a link when it goes live.

The network is called Skeptic Ink Network (SIN).

And yours truly will be a blogger there.

There's a group of secularists, philosophers, skeptics, and science blogs. I'll be doing mostly science and skepticism work and the occasional other post as well. My blog will be called Smilodon's Retreat.

Thanks and I hope to see you there.

Good luck! I'm sure Jow will be over..

Thanks. I'll let Joe spew for a while and show exactly what he is.

I'll challenge him to behave like a rational adult, he'll fail... often.

--------------Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

Quote of the day: "Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today — just a few hours before the debate started," Gore said on his network, Current. "Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, I don't know..."

LOL

Ok, scientists, discuss....

--------------"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths" -forastero

Quote of the day: "Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today — just a few hours before the debate started," Gore said on his network, Current. "Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, I don't know..."

LOL

Ok, scientists, discuss....

--------------You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

Quote of the day: "Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today — just a few hours before the debate started," Gore said on his network, Current. "Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, I don't know..."

LOL

Ok, scientists, discuss....

Which candidate tried to open the windows?

--------------Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

Quote of the day: "Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today — just a few hours before the debate started," Gore said on his network, Current. "Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, I don't know..."

LOL

Ok, scientists, discuss....

Which candidate tried to open the windows?

Haha! I had to look that one up...hadn't run across it yet. Too funny...Gotta love election year.

--------------"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths" -forastero

Not just a proven liar, but a proven liar who does not care that he's been shown to be a proven liar.

Not just a proven liar, but a proven liar who does not care that he's been shown to be a proven liar because people like you (low information voters) are happy to support as all you care about is appearances. Facts? Meh, not so much.

According to "science", that thing that you only care about if it tells you want you want to hear, some symptons of altitude sickness are:

Quote

Symptoms can be mild - headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of appetite and shortness of breath. Or they can be quite serious, such as swelling in the lungs and brain, that can result in death if not properly and quickly treated.

Let's see how well you'd perform if you had to debate suffering from all that.

Of course, I don't really think that's the reason.

But you asked what "science" had to say about such things. And now you know.

Or I could have just shorted this to:

"Do you want to talk about those Jellyfish yet, you ignorant harpy?"

Edited by oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 05 2012,06:12

--------------I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot standGordon Mullings

They are all piece of shit liars....Obama included. I'd rather pierce myself in the eye than vote this year, but as usual, I will have to drag my ass into the voter's booth and pull the lever for the lesser of two evils. Then I will go have a beer and try to forget what I just did.

--------------"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths" -forastero